any
objections to making those two ports consistent with all
the others so all NetBSD ports build the Xvfb virtual
framebuffer X server?

If it balloons out the build times I'd prefer not, at least on the
vax port. None of the vaxen I use have frame buffers.

Well, I think the point of xvfb is that it doesn't require or use a
framebuffer in the machine.

Yup, exactly. The relative additional time for a build with
and without xvb is going to be marginal - if you want to
save build time you should skip building X11 altogether,
or crossbuild from a faster box. Given that x68k is going
to have xvfb added that would leave vax as the odd port
out.
I'll time three vax builds - one without x11, one with x11
but no xvfb, and one with x11 and xvfb. These will all be
crossbuilds from a random x86 box, but as its relative
times we're looking at that should be fine.

Just do it. No point in having kludges in the tree to make native
build "fast" on the vax or wasting time even thinking about it.

Ooo. Thank you for that kind though. Yes. Doing native builds on a VAX
is not something we should even consider.

The fact that native builds don't even work, and that this isn't even
detectable by doing cross-builds is not something we care about either.

In fact, why even bother with the VAX?
I really like the way some people who work on NetBSD think... NOT!
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt%softjar.se@localhost || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol